Skip to main content
. 2022 Dec 22;23:1116. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-06032-y

Table 2.

Intraclass comparison of sagittal alignments from sitting to standing

Sagittal Alignments Non-degenerative Spine Degenerative Spine
Sitting Standing p value Sitting Standing p value
PT 30.9±10.9 6.5±7.4 <0.001* 29.2±12 11.6±9.1 <0.001*
SS 17±12.8 40.3±8.7 <0.001* 21.2±10.9 37.4±9.9 <0.001*
PI 47.9±11.5 46.9±10.9 0.004* 50.4±11.7 49.1±11.8 0.029**
LL 18.3±16.8 53.1±12.5 <0.001* 27.1±16.5 48.8±14.2 <0.001*
TK 23.5±11.6 28±10.9 <0.001* 32.9±14.2 32.8±13.9 0.905*
SVA 58.9±26 2.1±27.4 <0.001* 56.8±26.6 20.4±33.9 <0.001*
PFA 81.9±13.3 4.3±5.4 <0.001** 85.5±4.6 7.2±5.6 <0.001*
KF - 0.8±6.2 - -2.8±8.6
AF - 5.1±3.3 - 6.8±4.4

Significance level, α, was set at 0.05. Data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation

PT Spinopelvic tilt or pelvic tilt, SS Sacral slope, PI Pelvic incidence, LL Lumbar lordosis, TK Thoracic kyphosis, SVA Sagittal vertical axis, PFA Proximal femoral angle, KF Knee flexion angle, AF Ankle dorsiflexion angle

*p values from paired t test

**p values from Wilcoxon signed rank test